Search results
Facts of the case. Paul Davis, a resident of Michigan, worked for the federal government and upon retirement received benefits. Michigan law exempts state retirement benefits from state taxes. Smith unsuccessfully petitioned for a refund on the state taxes he paid on his federal retirement benefits. He then filed suit in the Michigan Court of ...
After the State denied appellant's request for refunds, he filed suit in the Michigan Court of Claims, alleging that the State's inconsistent treatment of retirement benefits violated 4 U.S.C. § 111, which authorizes States to tax.
Michigan Department of Treasury, 489 U.S. 803 (1989), is a case in the Supreme Court of the United States holding that states may not tax federal pensions if they exempt their own state pensions from taxation. [1]
In Davis v. Michigan Department of Treasury,' the Supreme Court held that a Michigan state statute, which imposed taxes on retirement benefits paid by the. federal government to its retirees, but not retirement benefits paid by the Michigan.
The treasury department denied Davis’s petition. Davis appealed in state court, arguing that Michigan’s state income tax violated 4 U.S.C. § 111 and the doctrine of intergovernmental tax immunity by discriminating against federal employees.
11 wrz 1990 · In Blue v. Department of Treasury, 185 Mich.App. 406, 462 N.W.2d 762, 764 (1990), the Michigan appellate court found insufficient connections between an inter vivos trust whose grantor was a Michigan resident and the State of Michigan's imposition of an income tax. Summary of this case from Linn v. Dep't of Revenue
Respondent notes that Treasury’s RAB 2015-23 “summarizes the MCL 205.27a(15)(b) definition of responsible person in the following way: (1) an officer of the business; (2) the officer controlled, supervised, or was responsible for the filing of
